Replies

You said — “That’s because you’ve been pegged as a troll. I don’t call everyone who disagrees with me a troll. Just the trolls. There’s a difference between an honorable disagreement and the standard issue-specific troll.”

Pegged as a troll specifically because one disagrees with you, on this specific subject of the Obama qualifications (per the Constitution) and thinks that you’re getting nowhere on it and thinks that you’re spinning your wheels, and thinks that Obama has gotten through all this because there is a big loophole in the system that has allowed him to do so — and — you don’t like the disagreement. There’s no other way around it... :-)

And, you don’t like it that you have no proof that Obama is in violation of the Constitutional requirements and that you have found no way to get the courts to side with your viewpoint on the issue.

Furthermore, you don’t like the rationale that since President Bush is sworn to uphold the Constitution and has the power of any investigation (and one went on with Obama’s passport being accessed), and that President Bush is in that position to *know* about Obama’s Constitutional qualifications — and that — President Bush has decided *not to prosecute* Obama, through the Justice Department, because no such violation exists in the first place.

All those reasons — in other words — the *content* of the disagreement with you — you don’t like — so that means anyone in that category of disagreement with you is a “troll” — from your perspective.

It should be so, so obvious to people by now... LOL...

—

On the other hand, I support blocking Obama from running full bore through this loophole again — by passing state laws to prevent it from happening. That’s a *real world* solution that goes beyond griping and complaining and calling people trolls.

At least I’ll be supporting the Oklahoma law which will *stop* Obama in the future, instead of going through endless *conspiracies* like you are...